Millions of people have been vaccinated longer than two months ago without incident at this point. We also know that, historically, when vaccines have caused severe adverse events, they have occurred within the first two months after vaccination. In the case of COVID-19 vaccines, we know that the vaccines are processed quickly and do not remain in the body for indeterminant amounts of time. When addressing appeals to ignorance, it is important to focus on what we do know. Because COVID-19 vaccines have not been used for years, this idea is used to sow doubt by suggesting that we don’t know what will happen years after getting vaccinated. This is an example of an appeal to ignorance because it focuses on what is not known. Other examples of causal fallacies are “ post hoc ergo propter hoc” (which translates to “after this therefore because of this”), when one thing occurs shortly after another, and “correlational,” when two things are discovered at the same time. Because patients with COVID-19 do not develop autoimmune conditions, it would be unlikely that the vaccine could cause autoimmunity. To address this argument, focus on why COVID-19 vaccines would not be expected to cause autoimmunity, such as the fact that vaccines cannot typically cause something that the disease itself cannot cause. The incorrect conclusion by a friend associating an autoimmune condition with receipt of a vaccine is used to incorrectly assume that the COVID-19 vaccine could also cause an autoimmune condition.
This is an example of a causal fallacy specifically, in this case, a type known as false cause. Address this argument by focusing on how we know the vaccine is safe rather than the issue brought up about the company. While it seems like relevant information, it distracts from the point that COVID-19 vaccines were tested in large, well-controlled clinical trials, and they do not cause infertility. This is an example of an ad hominem attack because it focuses on the company making the vaccine instead of the vaccine’s safety. In addressing this concern, it is important to focus on the question related to the vaccine’s safety rather than the tangential discussions related to online information and lawsuits. In this example, the discussion of removal of information and lawsuits involving Bill Gates distracts from the primary concern related to COVID-19 vaccines causing infertility. Red herrings are seemingly relevant arguments that serve to distract from the point at hand. The types of fallacies used above include ad hominem attack, appeal to ignorance, causal fallacy, false dichotomy, red herring, and slippery slope arguments.
Each of which has circulated during the pandemic. With this in mind, try your hand at identifying the logical fallacies in the following COVID-19-based fallacies. By addressing both the information and ways to critically evaluate it, you can position patients to look for these types of unsound arguments because we all have to work together to critically assess and diminish the spread of information that is purposely designed to scare and mislead. But, when people have questions based on misinformation, you may have an opportunity to not only address the factual information related to the question at hand, but to also discuss these common errors in logic. One way to evaluate information is to look for “logical fallacies,” which are errors in reasoning that make an argument unsound.Īs healthcare providers whose advice is often sought, confronting misinformation may feel uncomfortable. However, critical evaluation of information is essential for making decisions that are based on sound, scientific information, particularly when it comes to COVID-19. It can be tough for people to evaluate information that is emotionally charged and shared by trusted friends, such as often occurs on social media.
Misinformation has been circulating as quickly as the SARS-CoV-2 virus over the last year.
0 kommentar(er)
